141–150 of 223 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes but we live in a highly anti-competitive monopolized world now. With more to come under the new admin.
It’s hard to think of anything less monopolized than cloud hosting. There are hundreds of providers.
The 'experts' also made similar criticisms with the Fastly outage in 2021 and did anything obvious change as a result? In a week's time no national newspapers will be talking about this. Meanwhile, everyone that spends actual time in these areas: - Knows that running an operation at AWS scale is difficult and any armchair critism from 'experts' is exactly that. Actions speak louder than words. - Understands that the…
I think your third point is what I've had to attune to when criticizing cloud dependence. I think if your entire source of revenue is dependent on AWS then you should be prepared for 16+ hours of downtime per year. Individuals notice it more when something is down for hours but with good observability I am guessing the business notices it more when performance drags for the other 8742 hours of the year. Bursts of dow…
This is really good point that aligns with my experience. Today's event was LOUD and (compared to other incidents) long, but perhaps not really that long compared to the situation you describe that for most businesses is going to be more pernicious.
Business intelligence and analytics-type folks at $DAYJOB are _very_ watchful for the year-on-year deviations and even periods where the prediction lines didn't match up for even just a few hours.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It’s hard to think of anything less monopolized than cloud hosting. There are hundreds of providers.
For any business that matters, your choices are amazon, google, Microsoft, and that's about it. I couldn't even name another provider except maybe Hetzner
You could also argue that YT is on GCP (to some level) and that would probably bump that number up much higher.
The vast majority of people hosting things on the internet are on these providers. But you get downvoted for pointing that out now.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Also if you can't even do cross region, cross cloud won't happen
Cross region isn't simple when you have terabytes of storage in buckets in a region. Building services in other regions without that data doesn't really do any good. Maintaining instances in various regions is easy, but it's that data that complicates everything. If you need to use the instances in a different region because your main region is down, you still can't do anything because those cross region instances ca…
It is quite bizarre that such paltry amounts of data and problems with such tiny scale seem to pose challenging problems when done in the cloud.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
All the cloud providers have cheap compute but ludicrously expensive network egress. Trying to multicloud will stick you with a massive traffic bill, which is probably not a coincidence.
It's a market regulation failure. Which results in a failed market, with the cloud infra provider also providing data services. 20 years ago, there were 20+ widely used operational databases. Now, it's like DynamoDB with like half the market.
The 'experts' also made similar criticisms with the Fastly outage in 2021 and did anything obvious change as a result? In a week's time no national newspapers will be talking about this. Meanwhile, everyone that spends actual time in these areas: - Knows that running an operation at AWS scale is difficult and any armchair critism from 'experts' is exactly that. Actions speak louder than words. - Understands that the…
yeah but aws advertises as "trust me bro I won't go down for 99.99999%"
I've seen a lot of gov proposals using aws to 'get away with downtime management'
In 2011 there was some kind of big outage at some major AWS US-east pop. I started a job at a company (very boring B2C startup) which had taken the lesson from that, that "cloud anything is dangerous." They went and bought a bunch of literal servers and installed them in a datacenter, 90 miles away from our offices, and this is where all our applications ran for the remainder of that company's existence (about 6 more…
Examples of this are Windows/Mac, McDonalds/Burger King, Playstation/Xbox, Nvidia/?, AWS/Azure?, Android/iPhone, etc...
Basically, the majority of users all using the same dependency/platform/product is basic economics.
Can someone educate me on the solution to this? I assume most organizations, both small and large, just host on whatever provider they know or that costs them the least. If you have budget maybe you deploy to multiple providers for redundancy? But that increases cost and complexity. Who’s going to bother with colo given the cost / complexity? Who’s going to run a server from their office given ISP restrictions and do…
Rent servers from a local provider. It's cheaper, you get more control over the hardware, but most of all, it avoids correlated failures.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The "experts" in this case are > Dr Corinne Cath-Speth, the head of digital at human rights organisation Article 19 Dr. Cath-Speth has a PhD in cultural anthropology > Cori Crider, the executive director of the Future of Technology Institute A lawyer > Madeline Carr, professor of global politics and cybersecurity at University College London A professor. Her bio doesn't say what her degree is in, but she mostly seems…
[flagged]